Comcast SportsNet Houston’s president says the network could be made available immediately to Suddenlink cable customers if the carrier will agree to air the network on its expanded basic service across a five-state area rather than on an extra-cost sports tier in the Houston area only.

Matt Hutchings, who runs the network owned by the Rockets, Astros and NBC Sports group, made his comments in a letter dated Wednesday to Patty McCaskill, senior vice president of St. Louis-based Suddenlink. A copy of the letter was provided to the Chronicle and posted on the company’s website, IWantCSNHouston.com.

Suddenlink, which services Kingwood, Humble, Victoria and about 150 other systems in Texas as part of its network of about 1.4 million customers in 16 states, earlier this month offered to make CSN Houston ”available to customers in and around the Houston area, on a dedicated package of sports channels, at the per-customer price established by CSN Houston’s owners.”

Hutchings said in the letter that while he was pleased that “Suddenlink accepts the price of CSN Houston, and recognizes that the prices is fair,” the network believes it should be made available on Suddenlink’s expanded basic service alongside other regional sports networks, including Fox Sports Southwest.

“If you agree to put CSN Houston on the same tier as the other regional sports networks you carry, we are in agreement and your customers can begin receiving CSN Houston immediately,” he wrote.

Hutchings’ letter was made public as the Rockets prepare for their first NBA playoff run in four years with the possibility that some playoff games could be available in the Houston area only on CSN Houston. The playoff TV schedule will be released today.

“As you continue to carry Dallas-based teams such as the Ranger and Mavericks to the majority of your customers, including those in the Houston area, we hope that you will soon agree to offer the fans of Houston teams the same treatment, as they clearly would prefer to watch the teams they care about most,” Hutchings wrote. “There is no reason to favor Dallas-based teams over Houston teams.”

A Suddenlink spokesman said Wednesday night that he had not seen the letter and that the company would reserve comment until the letter is reviewed.

that’s the crux of the issue! at $3.40 for EVERY ONE of Suddenlink’s 1.4 million customers is $4.76 million per MONTH to the network. Put them on the sports tier and maybe 10% of the customers buy it and now it’s $476,000 per month. Difference is about $50 million per year!

It amazes me that our top teams are not on regular, OTA TV. Go to many places and EVERYONE has access to the games.
Cable, Sat. and antenna.
I can’t imagine that only having 40% of people with possible access is a good thing for any team.
If the Rockets or Astros were really good, people would use Proxy Servers and league passes to watch them.
I can’t imagine a worse time to force this scheme on Houston fans.
I support the Rockets, but if they win 2 games in the playoffs, I will be thrilled.
And the Astros….
well let’s just say in two weeks, no one is going to want this network. Maybe next fall, pending Rocket’s performance in the new season.
It’s just another Longhorn Sports Network – I don’t know any Longhorns that like it, and can’t see how it helps that team.

I think a large issue here is that the distributors are saddled with the existing Fox Sports SW contract, and they simply don’t want to incur the cost of two RSN’s in the same area. Rather than having to charge customers in these area’s more (which I should add DirecTV currently does in area’s with multiple RSN’s), they would rather put CSNH on a dedicated tier where the customers can voluntarily incur the costs. We may be stuck in this situation until the Fox Sports contract expires, or the network agrees to being on these tiers. Stalemate continues…….

Jason is right on. The issue here is effectively Fox Sports Southwest. They are collecting revenues in the Houston market although they no longer incur the costs of producing and airing Rockets and Astros games. Certainly Jim Crane, Les Alexander and the CSN guy (Hutchins) are all a bunch of liars but the one who is making out like a bandit is Fox Sports Southwest and no one is saying a thing about them.

What subscribers of DirecTv, ATT Uverse, Dish should be doing is contacting those providers and telling them they no longer want Fox Sports Southwest; threatening to change providers if they don’t remove them. As soon as these providers remove Fox Sports Southwest they’ll pay Comcast Sports Houston (assuming the price is reasonable).

What Comcast Sports Houston and the providers should be doing is agreeing to split the extra cost of CSH until Fox Sports Southwest is removed.

Again, the one who is smiling all the way to the bank is Fox Sports Southwest, yet no one seems to recognize it.

But many of us have grown to hate Mr. Hutchings deceptive advertising and do not want his channel, and are perfectly happy with Sports Southwest. I think CSN, has done an horrible job of promoting this channel, and it is obvious from reading all the negative comments like mine. Rot in you know where CSN Houston.

Big12, HS football from three states and an actual MLB team is more relevant than Crane’s crew to be on basically every tier throughout the 5 state region. Rockets’ only seen in Houston area. Providers have to look at the big picture.

The providers should have done this a long time ago. Make a reasonable offer and force CSN to choose between the fans and money. I have read about 2 reasonable offers in the last two weeks, and CSN has chosen money twice.

The Astros are seeking a deal similar to those their competitors have. These deals last 10-20 years, so selling low now would be a terrible long-term mistake. Rangers made their big deal a couple of years back with FSN, but neglected to get a larger ownership stake. They have already started spending money on free-agents that won’t be earned until 2015.
The Astros ability to spend on free-agents in a couple of years (when their crop of rookies start coming up) will be determined largely by the value of the deal they make for carriage of CSN.
And, when the Astros do start competing (and they will), the same people who are talking crap now will be going bonkers if the telecasts aren’t available on basic or x-basic service. We’ve been through that before, too.
History repeats itself.

I couldn’t care less about these regional dedicated sports channels. The only option that really works for me is to move ALL of the dedicated sports channels to a dedicated OPTIONAL sports tier and let the people like you who want this content subscribe and pay for it and leave the rest of us out of it. Why should I have to pay for your TV. I already have to pay for the stadiums for this now overpriced entertainment. I’d rather go watch the Skeeters anyway – a much better sports experience.

By the way, I don’t think the folks at Fox Sports ever refused to continue producing and broadcasting the Houston teams to force them to form their own network. On the contrary, the Houston teams are refusing to allow Fox Sports access to do this. Once CSN fails, the teams could go back to Fox Sports just like in years past – although Fox Sports might not be so generous financially as before the Houston owners tried to take all the money for themselves.

Once the first round of the playoffs are over (and any NBA playoff games are all on national tv), NO ONE will give a flying flip about this network. All they’ll have to offer is Astros baseball. Good Luck.

I have been following this CSN travesty and wish the Chronicle would actually report the full story instead of just publishing absurd CSN’s press releases.

I think Messrs. Crane and Alexander are a pair of greedy billionaires trying to extract payment from every cable subscriber in Houston weather they watch CSN or not. That is wrong. The Rockets and Astros were available on sports networks before the Crane and Alexander decided they could make more money by making every cable subscriber pay an exorbitant monthly fee to them. I hope the cable providers don’t give into their demands. Definitely don’t make all of us extra pay for that network. I believe the vast majority of Houstonians have absolutely no interest in watching anything CSN has to offer. Put the games back on the sports networks that cable viewers are already paying for.

Ummm Ted….you’re only paying for those other sports channels because they had the properties they no longer do. Without those properties in the past, your provider would likely not have signed on for them…or at least would not have done so for the same per subscriber fee.

uncsig is probably right. However, now that ‘the cat is out of the bag’ people are awakening to the way they are being ripped off by the major sports franchises. The majority of subscribers do not view these sports offerings. They are now finding that they don’t want to pay for them. The world is changing. Bring on ala carte programming.

A VERY high majority of non-Comcast subscribers do NOT want the Astros on regular packages because it will increase their costs unnecessarily. There’s absolutely NOTHING wrong with putting it on a fee-pay tier for those that actually WANT the channels. So you can argue around that fact all you want – but most do NOT want CSNH if it costs them more money.

The price is fair ONLY if you want the sports package, which is what Suddenlink is asking. It is NOT fair if you have no interest in it but have to pay for it anyway because CSN demands that all customers pay for it as part of basic service. Tell Hutchings to go play with his network by himself. It’s just part of a specialized sports tier if it’s a part of anything. The more Hutchings talks, the more I hope CSN just sinks into oblivion.

I agree with this more than anything . . .I have had comcast in the past and hated the whole experience . .but any chance i’ve ever had of returning has been crushed by hutchings whole advertising program . . .i’ve never wished anyone would fail more than hutchings

There’s no new offer, only a regurgitation of CSN’s position from day one: Pay us but make the channel available for free via your basic cable package.

David: They should let you write the headlines for your story. Yours is closer to accurate, although the deal does not only hinge on availability but how the cable providers will offer the channel to their customers.

The only question I have right now is: How does this Hutchings guy still have his job? Who’s he taking charm lessons from? Jim Crane?

It may be because Matt comes off as disingenuous and self-serving. The smartest people in this whole mess– besides the cable providers not named Comcast– are Leslie Alexander and the Rockets brass. They have wisely kept a low profile even though the impasse has probably hurt them more than the Astros at this point. I think they understand that– as far as the public is concerned– the Astros / Rockets / NBC triumvirate is the villain here, not the cable providers.

What exactly is the “counteroffer,’” David? Hutchings is just repeating the exact same demand as always – broadcast it to everybody across multiple states and charge for every single customer on the entire network or you don’t get to provide it to even that small group in and around Houston who might want it. I for one wouldn’t willingly pay even $3 a month for CSN. Just like I won’t willingly pay extra for premium movie channels.

Let those who want this sort of premium content, subscribe and pay for it. Wait, isn’t that what Suddenlink and other providers keep trying to offer and Hutchings refuses to consider? I still hope CSN goes into greedy oblivion. Hutchings is demanding that the providers force me to pay for something I will never watch. Would serve the owners right if Fox Sports refused to let them come back to the existing regional sports network. Actually, I wouldn’t mind if my carrier dropped Fox Sports, too, and replaced it with any one of several entertainment channels I would like to watch but can’t because I have to pay for all these dedicated sports channels I never watch.

How about having the owners take the sports news about the Rockets, Astros, etc., out of the Houston Chronicle. Publish it themselves separately at extra charge as Houston Sports Chronicle, and then license distribution of their new product back to the Chronicle on a per subscriber basis, but (since they don’t have their own subscriber base) ONLY if Hearst agrees to pay for and deliver the new HSC to every single Houston Chronicle subscriber? That’s the CSN stand – but they are arguing that the Chronicle price should be dropped a little since it no longer contains the Houston sports news it did previously so that the total package would be only a little more expensive for everybody. How’s that concept working for you?

The phrasing of offer/counteroffer is the description that officials on both sides use to describe the exchange of proposals. In this case, Hutchings acknowledges that the sides have agreed on price but not on carriage. Now Suddenlink, I presume, will reply with another letter addressing Hutchings’ comments about carriage.

I have had Directv for 10 years and, if you are a sports fan, they are, by a longshot, the best cable/satellite provider out there. It is not even close. They provide a competitive price compared to the others (a bit higher, but worth it with all the HD sports channels), but the customer service is unmatched in this industry.

The Texans will not be next, as all NFL regular-season and playoff games are governed by contracts with national over-the-air networks like CBS, Fox and NBC and cable networks like ESPN and NFL Network. Heck, when a Texans game is due to be carried via one of the cable networks, the NFL even allows its rights to be sold to a local broadcast channel. This happened in December when the Texans played the Patriots on MNF and KHOU 11 simulcast the ESPN coverage.

The only Texans game content that could even theoretically be aired via a RSN would be preseason games (yawn). If anything the Texans are probably one of the biggest beneficiares of this whole debacle – drawing attention to the easy availability of Texans games on TV while entirely new Rockets and Astros rosters toil in relative anonymity on CSN – and only strengthens their position as the region’s #1 team.

@anthonyNtX – the Texans will never go to this because the NFL does not allow teams to negotiate individual contracts withe Networks like this. The League negotiates with the Networks and then the League dispenses the profits down to the Teams.

Comcast is asking too much money for their product. The Rockets are in the playoffs, so their games will be on TNT and the Astros will be lucky to win 50 games this year. The demand for this station, especially at that price, is not there. As a DirecTV subscriber, I hope that DirecTV doesn’t give in.

Sorry Matt, you are selling a low-budget product at a high dollar price and you are NOT FOOLING ANYONE. No matter who you try to blame, in the end the consumer will pay more and eventually some of the money will end up on Comcast.

If you want viewers, but CSN Houston sports on Over The Air HD, Ch 20 used to run the Rockets and the Astros. Create a 24×7 OTA HD CNS Houston sports channel and you will get a lot more viewers and sell more commercials.

Try offering customers good service and try attracting viewers instead of running them off. The old cable TV “we are you only option” blackmail sales plan is going to fail and only make everyone hate Comcast more.

It’s worth pointing out that shortly after the end of each Astros game the game will be streamed on MLBTV as an archive game which is free of blackout restrictions. This might be of benefit to a handful of you.

Oh, the ” Wheelings and dealings” are so confusing, that I can’t offer an intelligent opinion! I am a suddenlink cable customer on T.V., phone, and computer service. If suddenlink doesn’t show the Astros, I’ll just have to follow them on news reports online. It can fade my interest in the Astros, but what else can I do? BYE

Hutchings and his press release are offering nothing new. The cable carriers simply want to put CSN on a sports tier where those subscribers who want CSN can pay extra for it, and those subscribers not interested in CSN don’t have to pay for it. What can be more fair to cable tv subscribers than that? Nothing. Hutchings, Crane and Co. don’t care about fairness to cable subscribers, they just want their money, and to not have any say in the matter. Hutchings commercials states that CSN and fans “want answers” from the cable providers as to why Houston teams are not being shown. The answer is the owners are greedy and want to stick it to cable tv subscribers. There is your answer Hutchings.

It is not that simple. Every other RSN out there is on expanded or basic service so why should CSN Houston be different? I understand the frustration from non-sports fans, but it is the reality of televised sports. It draws the largest live audience than any other programming on television. Sports fans don’t want to DVR the games. They want to watch it live. Thus, advertisers love to advertise on live sporting events, which brings in more money for the cable providers. Therefore the RSNs use this as a negotiation tactic. CSN Houston is simply wanting what every other RSN is getting. It may seem unfair to you, but it is the reality of televised sporting events.

Here’s some news for you Mr. Hutchings, NBC, your parent company, also favors Dallas teams during the NFL season by putting on the Cowboys multiple times on Sunday Night Football, and so does ESPN for MNF despite the fact that the Texans have been a better team the last 3 years. I support the local teams and don’t root for Dallas teams at all, but it’s a bigger market and their teams have more national appeal than ours, sorry but the truth hurts.

Also Mr. Hutchings if you are at a restaurant and are full after your meal and do not want dessert but your server brings you and charges you for dessert how would you feel about that? That is essentially what you want to do to some customers, provide and charge them for something they do not want. And just because there are other regional sports networks that do benefit from the “everyone pays” system doesn’t mean that it’s right. Maybe it was just bad timing for you and your network and people are tired of paying for channels they don’t watch.

Comcast’s customer service after Ike was HORRIBLE. We will NEVER, EVER, EVER go back. Did I say NEVER, EVER? Contract with FOX is a CONTRACT. There is a reason those are enforceable. If UVerse doesn’t get the local sports teams, my pre-teens may grow up as fans of winninger (it’s a word I made up) teams that they can actually watch on t.v. The owners made the choice. We are happy to buy Angels, Rangers, OKC, or Spurs gear. (Hmm, lost merchandise fees would seem to hurt.) I am happy to support other teams out of spite.) My heart will always be with the local teams and local players, but this house will NEVER, EVER, EVER go back to Comcast. CSN and Owners, your move. BTW, I am the mom in the house, and there is NO overruling me.

Here’s the plan for Crane and Co.: Force all cable tv subscribers over an area of several states to pay for CSN. This will create an uncompetitive market with guaranteed revenues (100+ million a year) much like the taxpayers who built our stadium. We can keep team salaries very low, say, $20 million/yr. and we can rake in profits in excess of $80 million/yr, no matter how poor the product we put out. Thus, the “private company with a public flair” Astros will become a cash cow courtesy of those rubes down south.

CSN Houston has done the what they least want to do – and that is make anyone in Houston (that doesn’t have Comcast) care less about the Astros/Rockets any longer. This then goes to that people stop going to the games, and it is a double loss. I’ll still go to Astros games this summer, but only when convenient and not as many as I went to last year. Thanks for saving me money, CSN!

I think CSN-Houston needs to realize that they’re not going to get the satellite providers to agree to charge >$40/year per customer in New Mexico (Rockies/Nuggets country), Arkansas (Cardinals country), and the Dallas area (Rangers/Mavs turf)… and let’s not forget Central Texas (where the Spurs have the region locked down).
All the teams mentioned above have experienced more success than the Rockets and Astros lately with playoff appearances, NBA Titles, and World Series appearances.
Few people feel like their TV service bill isn’t too high already- so trying to negotiate through the paid media isn’t exactly a good way to do business. I’m actually going to stop watching sports and listening to sports radio until this is resolved because I’m tired of hearing the CSN-Houston guy giving one side of the story.

Subscriber fees are notoriously hard to pin down and to quantify because there are different fees for each zone. Zone 1 or the inner market, for example, would be the area in which Fox count carry both the Rangers and Mavs and CSN Houston can carry the Astros and Rockets. There are other zones in which subscribers can see only baseball. The research firm SNL Kagen has estimated that Fox Sports Southwest’s average subscriber fee is about $2.90 per month.

In my opinion, this whole thing is strictly business. The concerns and comments of the fans is not a consideration here. NBC/Comcast should simply buy an existing under-performing broadcast channel much like NBC and CBS have done recently to launch their new full sports “networks”. Comcast should put up the millions, and buy their way in the way others have done. I bet they could buy one of those many soccer channels no one watches.

As a former Suddenlink customer in Kingwood, which is part of Houston, we don’t have the choice of Uverse — we have Suddenlink, Dish TV or DirecTV. But as a customer who doesn’t watch sports, I believe that they will use this opportunity to hit all their customers with yet ANOTHER increase. We had increases in December, January and February and still had the lousiest cable service i have ever had in the 31 places I have lived; that why you can color me FORMER.

The author of this propaganda must be a CSN employee. CSN, which is Comcast, along with Crane and Alexander are trying to blackmail the other cable companies. I hate Comcast more than any other company, and this is a good example of why. The Comical has completely lost all credibility as a reliable new source. It is akin to a communistic propaganda piece. All of their articles are tainted.

The Astros and the Rockets made a deal with the devil and now the devil is in the details. Shades of Gordon ‘greed is good’ Gecko. Demanding a subscription price of a top tier team for a less than mediocre product is not a good pricing point. It appears the Yankees YES Network is the model being used but the problem is that the Astros are not the Yankees and the Rockets, well, they are not either.

CSN wants paid for all subscribers on a providers service and not just the interested viewers. Can’t force them to the stadiums to pony up so they just force the cost on any and all viewers. Might be a little more palatable if the pricing wasn’t so far out of line but after the Yankees made their deal with Newscorp last year and cashed in on the increased value, it seems the owners here are trying to expedite the process and shave the wait time. Personally I don’t really give it much weight as I am so disgusted with how these franchises have been run it has taken the enjoyment out of attending or watching.

. . . the so-call management of the Astros can take a hike . . . they rolled the dice and lost, big time . . . folks, if able, financially, and otherwise, subscribe to MLB TV or Game Day and enjoy, . . . you may not get the Astros, but that’s what makes it enjoyable . . .

Do you have any information on whether or not subcribers to DirectTV, Uverse, etc have been successful at getting reimbursements for not carrying Rockets/Astros games? Ralph Cooper wrote an article recently that claimed some have.

I wince every time I see Hutchings on TV attempting to convince us that CSN isn’t the villain in this debacle. His disingenuous speech does nothing to dissuade me from my impression that CSN is simply attempting to leverage their competitor’s profits in markets outside of Houston based on the fantasy that the Rockets, Lastros, and Dynamo may become irresistible to those fans/customers in the future. He can keep dreaming. They are trying to sell Yugos on a Mercedes lot.

I’m so sick of them comparing their network to Fox Sports SW. Fox Sports also has major college sports, and is essential for sports fans in the fall for football. And that’s not just 100% regional, they air PAC-12 in addition to Big XII. Are they really going to try and convince us that the Astros in September are as valuable as college football?

I have Directv since 2008, switched from Comscast after Ike. I paid less for 3 rooms than I would for cable. First receiver is free, every other is $6.00 per month. Comcast HD box $8.99 a month, none are free. Do the math. Fox Sports Southwest is still a viable in Houston, Rangers games air here, Stars games air here. Fox Sports 1 will be here, replacing Speed, & Fox Sports 2 replacing Fuel TV, I have both, UFC over Astros, Rockets ay day.